Ricoh GR III review

Introduction

The Ricoh GR III is a compact 24MP APS-C format camera with a 28mm equivalent F2.8 lens. The third in a series of APS-C 'GR' compacts from Ricoh, the GR III has been a long time coming, but updates the GR II in some highly significant ways. Several Ricoh representatives have described the GR III to us as a 'labor of love' - keep reading to find out whether the work of the company's engineers has paid off.

Key specifications:

24MP APS-C sensor

18.3mm (28mm equivalent) F2.8 lens

3-axis in-body SR stabilization system

On-sensor phase detection autofocus

Ultrasonic sensor cleaning

3" 1.04M-dot touch-sensitive LCD screen

Anti-aliasing filter simulation

Optional 21mm equivalent GW-4 wide adapter lens

1080/60p video

USB 3.0 (Type C) enables in-camera charging

Ricoh took its time with the GR III. The original GR was announced a full six years ago, and the intervening GR II was such a minor update that Ricoh felt compelled to reduce its MSRP by $100 less than a month after it was introduced.

The GR III is a major update to the GR and GR II that preceded it. The resolution increase from 16-24MP was expected (and overdue) but the addition of sensor stabilization, a touch-sensitive screen, and the removal of the built-in flash make the GR III a very different photographic tool, albeit one that should feel instantly familiar to GR / II fans.

The GR III is available now for $899: $100 more than the introductory price of the GR II in 2015 (and $200 more after the GR II's rapid MSRP reduction three weeks after it launched).

What's new and how it compares

The GR III might look very similar, but it's a significant update over the GR and GR II. Find out more about what's new.

Comments

No internal flash means no deal for me, so I will be keeping my Coolpix A. One of the great things about a camera like this is the ability to use fill flash in sunny conditions because all shutter speeds are flash synced. If the GR IV has a built in flash I will buy it, if I should live that long anyway.

I have this combo - bought it for my significant other but I use it quite a bit. Great if you're shooting on automatic but the manual controls are very poor. It is very compact and portable though. Raw quality is also excellent for what it is.

The M100 is really not that bad for one of the most compact APS-C MILC. The touch screen is great which often more than makes up for the lack of a second control dial. You have a control wheel for shooting TV/Av and when shooting manual it's a single tap of the screen to switch between adjusting shutter speed and adjusting aperture.

Don't get me wrong there is lots of room for improvement with ergonomics even on the small body but controlling is not as bad as I thought it would be.

If Thom Hogan numbers on actual sales dollars are accepted it appears Ricoh is about the only camera company to generate more year on year sales revenue in past quarter. Now, they may have been sinking far faster than the rest, but it must be encouraging that the intended audience may be actually purchasing the camera. Ricoh appreciates the vocal supporters, hears the detractors, but needs the buyers if they are to continue.

The funny thing about the Hogan numbers is that they've been interpreted as evidence that this camera is making a huge impact on the company's bottom line. It would have to be one hell of a seller for that to be true, because the camera had barely arrived on the market when the quarter closed (that Hogan cited figures for and based his observation on). And it's true that it's been top dog of DPR for quite a few days now, but I wonder if other factors aren't playing a role, like the Theta, the KP, lens sales (D FA* 50, maybe), or that Ricoh has perhaps been benefitting more than other brands from new international trade deals.

Thanks for an insightful review. This is definitely a camera that is aimed at a limited range of users but as said for street photography or people looking for pocketable camera with great image quality this can be a great choice.

This is a PERFECT camera! It would be even PERFECTER if Ricoh had made every design decision completely different. Especially if they could simultaneously just keep everything the same too. So, in conclusion: this is a perfect camera that could be vastly improved my making it a different camera.

At this point this new released camera is quite bad . I agree with you and with this TS :https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62480050 Ricoh must be kidding to shamelessly ask a $1000 USD (with taxes ) for that . They should have included a small pocket flash and a spare battery at least. The only ppl who perhaps buy it are those who really loyal yo the brand (but the brand isn’t ), not really smart consumers and some Rich folks to try it out and toss after 150 shots . It’s not backordered ,actually as some stated , many units were recalled and returned and that’s what created it at some retailers. Here in Ontario no backorders.

The GR III touchscreen interface works quite well, it's very responsive and complementing the dials-and-buttons interface nicely.I like for example how I can override the AF - if, say, it's automatically selecting the AF areas and I want it to focus on something specific. Very fast; just a touch, no need to change any setting.

No EVF is a con for this kind of zoom range? Seriously? There were many camera reviews done by early days of dpreview back then and there were a lot fewer cons as the cameras were so good, now for some reason, they have to put as many cons to equal the pros.

The GRD itself was great for the compact camera for enthusiasts of its day - the GR lost a lot of its compactness benefit in the interests of larger sensor. The sensor size increase was a benefit but my GR was too large for this person to carry everywhere. So my compromise has been the no-longer-sold GM5 which is not really pocketable in my book but has the advantage of being a systems camera and can dip into the stock of wonderful M4/3 lenses against being restricted to one lens copes with all needs.

Furthermore the GM5 came with a quite useful built in evf and a little clip on flash in the box.

I am a long term Ricoh fan and appreciate that the GRIII is a pinnacle of its type with “fixed collapsing prime lens” - but the reality for me at least is a tiny systems camera with built in evf and 100+ lenses I can choose from. But of course the GM5 is no more - but I can continue to manage as it still is a much more versatile camera than any GRD/GM can ever be.

Tom Hogan says the Nikon 1 cameras are collectables, so I am buying them for cheap and hoarding them up (Only the V1 and J5). The J5 with 18mm normal lens have excellent image quality. May be it is the poor man's equivalent of HCB's Leica for street photography. However, the protruding 18mm with the J5 cannot be compared to GR 3

There's an issue with the studio scene widget - it shows cross-hatching and artifacts on the ISO 100 RAW sample, that are not there (yes, I downloaded the ACR-generated JPEG).But not always. If - for example - I click on the "even higher" link just below the widget, then select again ISO 100, the image looks fine.

I don’t know why some Ricoh users here are trying to defend this stripped down camera. The web is full of negative reviews criticizing the horrible battery life and the lack of flash. Even paid by Ricoh utube bloggers mention it in some , more hidden , way. I’ve never seen so many negative reviews when the GRII was released and it is ,actually, a better camera overall in real use. Ricoh perhaps aware of what’s happening and could partially rectify the issues as once Sony did with their alpha 7r and 7s : they started to include a second battery for free . Fuji , PanaLeica and Canon (M1-M2) we’re shipping their cameras with small pocketable flash units .

Oh, that image of the EOS-M with the SMALL flash supplied and a zoom...Did you just decide on your own that nobody should ever use a pocketable camera? <rolling eyes> It's not like we were asking for your permission...

While I feel like the GR III's ergonomic and battery life are behind the GR II, I really love the IBIS and the new in-camera raw development settings. The price is quite "ouch"-ey though. I think it should be around $700.

@Alex I already bought it for around $999 here. The price hurts so much. Ricoh's price in my country is quite constant. I bought my GR II for around $700 2 years ago and the price was still the same a month ago (it is $550 now after GRIII's release).

@Fazal I think so too. Despite many people hate the GR III here, I think the unit itself just being sold well. I even need to wait for 2 weeks to get my purchase bonuses (blue ring cap + additional battery) because they are out of stock. Yikes!!

@luck002: to be sure, there is an early adopter tax. I've wanted a GR for a long while, but hesitated because of the dust issues on the GRII. I don't regret buying my GRIII one bit, and it even replaced my RX1RII as EDC despite my preferring 35mm as a FL, simply because the smaller size makes it more carry-friendly.

I am getting out of my GRIII the same quality I used to get from my Fuji 645 rangefinder in the film days! Seriously, the resolution of this camera is nothing short of amazing. The price is not too high; it's an incredible instrument. It doesn't look like much, but think of it -- it's like 80 lines/mm on film days and with a lens capable of delivering it! It's sharper than most aps-c or mft lenses.

@LucaPCP: I dunno. I took some photos of the Golden Gate Bridge last weekend with my GRIII, as my father was with my Nikon Z7, and I had taken photos from the other side with my old Fuji G617. On the GRIII, the suspension cables anchoring the road bed to the catenaries look like a single cable. On the Z7, they look like two cables each. Only the G617 slides (Velvia 100) show the real 4 cables.

Wondering what would it take RICOH to make this "tool" waterproof (even up to 5m). In extreme travelling conditions i.e. continuous rain, stormy weather/snow, waterfalls, hiking, mountains, desert etc. (Iceland trip for example) an APS-C camera with Olympus's waterproofing grade would be an amazing deal.

Waterproofing it would be, I'd guess, very difficult - due to the retractable lens (but not only). Waterproofing would put lots of restrictions on the camera body, and I'm afraid it would result on something other than a GR.

Weatherproofing, I hope they'll manage this on the next model. I might even upgrade because of it.

I am waiting with the purchase because I like to learn from long time users reports. Both, my GR and GR II developed the Closed Shutter Problem which made the cameras use- and worthless before the shutter counts reached 50K frames. I hope that Ricohs Engineers quietly adressed and fixed the internal lens module parts from "dying at a young age".

My wishes for the GR IV:- Bring back the build-in flash - Address the cameras Achilles' heel by developing a non-rectractable 28mm pancacke lens module (ex. fuji x100 series). It could enable the camera body to become weather sealed and noticably reduce the still reported dust issue.

Forget the aps-c sensor - just fit a M4/3 mount and 20mp 4/3 sensor and get access to the whole range of M4/3 lens stock. Keep the GRIII as it is obviously a great camera. Call the new (extra) camera the GRX and make it a systems camera.

There is a great big gaping hole in the market since Panasonic stopped making the GM series bodies.

GRX with Panasonic 42.5/1.2 Nocticron? With their 15/1.7 lens? Or even their very nice 35-100/f2.8? Compact wide zoom? 7-14/4.0?

I have both GRii and GRiii and the iii is amazing. The ibis and 24mp are great, and the colors in the jpegs are much better. I also have an MFT camera, and the only lenses that come close to it in resolution (but do not improve on it) are the PanaLeica lenses; certainly not the Oly 17mm, which is quite poor, and also not the 20mm pancake. The Leica Summilux 15/1.7 is close, but the GRiii is still better resolution-wise. And a camera with 15/1.7 does not fit in your pocket.

So sure, when I go with an official large camera, I often choose my Pen-F for the ability to also use long lenses. But for a pocketable camera, or one that you can slip in your travel / work bag, the GRiii is fantastic.

LucaPcp. I use the GRII professionally and once I customized the vibrant filter , my jpegs were very goodas for micro 4/3 lensMaybe you got a lemon because the 20mm is a very good lens. Most reviews says it is sharper than the 15mmoh and the Pen-F is not a great choice for fitting long lenses unless you are talking about the smaller F4.5 to 5.6 zooms

I was worried about battery life but luckily I also have the Olympus TG-4 with a spare which is compatible. As it turns out I’ve never had to change it while out taking photographs. I always turn it off between shots, and I’m not a machine gun shooter (doesn’t suit this type of camera anyway. I can’t say I’ve been restricted by battery life at all, less so than the Fuji X100F/T.

Fashion photography is NOT portrait. For fashion work you're shooting the OUTFIT and designs, not portraits, but even for that work I've never seen a soul working with a 28mm prime. No one says you can't shoot portraits with 28mm or even 20mm, but if you plan to do a lot of it, a fixed 28mm camera isn't a very good tool.

Most shooters will fall back on 85mm, but the 105 and 135mm lenses have gained a lot of popularity. 200mm is also excellent and very flattering. 28mm is pretty bad for faces, fine for group or full body. If you really want to shoot people, a GR is not a very versatile pick.

Exactly. As much as I enjoyed my GR, it was just a poor camera for too many subjects. Essentially I found it much like a camera phone with much better quality, but stuck with an often useless perspective.

People take good portraits all the time with cellphones, which tend to be 28mm. So if you can live with cellphone portraits, then yes, it's fine. MrHollywood, many of the better arts magazines will run environmental portraits of, say, celebrities that are obviously taken with wide angle lenses. The type of high school or family portraits taken by mall photographers with totally blurred-away backgrounds are literally scraping the bottom of the barrel nowadays as far as portraiture is concerned.

By the way MrHollywood, I tend to agree with you that 28mm is too wide for myself. I use my GR2 less because I have a 40mm camera that is better suited to my vision. But that is not because I take portraits (which I don't).

Virtually nobody shoots portraits at 28mm. Yes, they are occasions where it's done. But not one wedding shooter, event shooter or anyone who seeks to create intimate candids reaches for a 28mm prime. I don't know why anyone would argue this. Go into ANY amateur or pro forum and ask "what's the best portrait lenses?" No one will suggest a 28mm. There may be instances where the 28mm will work. I've seen some wonderful portraits at 24mm, but that doesn't make the WA focal length something recommended. I've also seen some great scenic stuff shot at 135mm, but if someone asks for the best ALL AROUND lens for scenic, the suggestions will be for 14-24 99% of the time.I got rid of my GR because it was a failure when it came to being versatile. A fixed lens camera has its charms, but it has specific weaknesses that cannot be overcome. 28mm is like driving forever in 2nd gear. You can do a lot, but then there's a lot you can't do.

I find it humorous when experienced people get surprised, only after using the camera for a while, that an 18.3mm prime behaves like an 18.3mm and not a superzoom.Then start a bashing campaign to make people know 18.3mm is 18.3mm.

Heck! Even Sony RX100 series have a pop up flash , and they are even smaller. And it doesn’t matter the sensor size in this regard. Smartphones got it ... The only reason Ricoh stripped it off is because the already lacklustre CIPA rating of 150 shots per charge (less in practice ) would be a 100 shots with a flash . By ditching it out they were able to get it rated at 150 shots at least. This camera reminds me of “optimizations” at work places .

A large and excellent performing sensor. Much larger than normal for such a sized camera.

All in a package that fits in your back pocket.

I mean, again, seriously ??

And it is not even that expensive - where else is there a 24mp APSC sensor camera with a 2.8 lens and IBIS you can you get for $800? Let alone one with great optical quality you can fit in your back pocket.

Glad you asked Mike. Why do compact cameras fail? Just as soon as they are built down to meet the popular market price.

I have had 3 out of 4 GRD models and the GR itself - at which point it became too large for my personal requirements. It was a question of whether once size became borderline the versatility of a similar size systems camera body became more interesting.

However the GRD/GR has remained interesting because it was and is an enthusiasts camera better built and has enviable firmware support. Funnily enough the firmware and enthusiast support in use does not review very well.

Those that have simply wanted a cheap easily portable compact camera have long since opted for the “automatic dumbness” of the mobile phone.

Point’n’press. The GRIII is much more than that. It is a pity that it cannot offer a built in evf and a mount system that can handle a wide variety of lenses.

If it had "a mount system that can handle a wide variety of lenses" I wouldn't have bought mine. Because it would no longer be pocketable, and as a non-pocketable camera I already have an ILC kit.This is a GR; not a me too ILC. Get over it.

It will be interesting to see how well this camera sells. It seems to me, and I could be wrong, that the market for a camera with limited capabilities but offers great IQ in a pocketable size has limited appeal. I say this because the IQ of the 1" pocketable zooms from Sony and Canon have IQ that is nearly indistinguishable from APS-C cameras below ISO 800.

Not really. The initial orders are probably from existing owners of the previous models wanting to upgrade. The back orders most likely reflect the fact Ricoh doesn't expect to sell many. They are probably limiting production so as not to be stuck with excess inventory. It's such a niche product sales will always be limited.

What is there not to like? No zoom, mediocre AF, no flash, mediocre video, no EVF, OVF costs extra. For the people that want this camera these things may not matter but I believe that these limitations will turn off most potential buyers. Since this camera appeals to you, you don't understand that most people want more and are willing to sacrifice a small amount of IQ to get a 1" sensor camera that is far more versatile. I don't understand what the appeal is because small size is a lower priority for me than APS IQ so I'll take the 1" sensor zoom.

@tbcass Yes, it is not a mass market product but that doesn't mean it makes no profit. I want to buy it because I really liked the GR for travelling but now I use a RX1r II so the overlap is too big. If you ever travel like me you will reduce all the size and weight of your stuff. And for video I now use a Osmo Pocket. Is it great? No, but for some short impressions it is good enough.

I don't want anything and I'm not complaining about anything. My points were to point out why the camera has a very limited market, nothing more, nothing less. Nothing I said is a criticism of the camera but are reasons why it's not a big seller. If you go back and read my first post in this subthread you should understand that.

Fair point, but you were holding the GR3 up in comparison to 1" cams from Sony , for example.

This makes no sense. I have a Sony RX something and I see no comparison. None at all.

Ricoh are ( I am certain ) well aware that their new camera does not have a zoom lens, or a flash. They have probably noticed this and factored it into their expectations in terms of sales. I cannot see a Ricoh exec somehow shocked that their camera is not suitable for someone who wants a built in flash. Just like I am not expecting someone to compare my Sigma SD-H with a cheese sandwich. Or compare my X-T3 with a prawn salad.

Ricoh know what their market is. It clearly is not you. I get that. It's me. And a few thousand other people like me. For us, it really hits the spot.

Oh? "I say this because the IQ of the 1" pocketable zooms from Sony and Canon have IQ that is nearly indistinguishable from APS-C cameras below ISO 800."It looks like you're blaming the GR for not being a Sony RX 100.

Alex SarbuWhen I said "I say this because the IQ of the 1" pocketable zooms from Sony and Canon have IQ that is nearly indistinguishable from APS-C cameras below ISO 800" I meant it. I defy you to tell the difference in IQ between 1" sensor camera IQ and this Ricoh below ISO 800. I say this as an owner of a 42mp FF camera. The difference between my FF and APS-C cameras at iso 800 and below is greater than the Ricoh and a 1" sensor camera IMO.

SpeedyNeo

That is true but it does not address the issue that this camera has a limited market which after all was my point in the first place.

People who compare the 1" cameras' IQ to the GRIII are delusional. I have the original RX100, the RX100M4 and the GRIII, and there is no comparison. The GRIII is heads and shoulders above the mushy RX100 series.

not to mention zooms this size are just mediocre compared to even an ordinary lens, let alone the GR's outstanding prime. The only thing that compares is the Sony RX1 series, the Leica Q series or the Sigma DP1M.

My last post. I find it curious that people defend this or any camera from even the slightest hint of criticism. The emotional attachment of some people to an inanimate object can sometimes be surprising. I would hate to see the response to someone actually trolling and saying the camera sucks.

Struggling to see the point of your posts. It’s self evident the Ricoh has a limited appeal to a specific market so I think most of us really struggling to understand why you are so invested in making these pointless statements.

So you are commenting about a thing you are not interested in, nor have any intention of purchasing; an item that is of no appeal to you, does not meet your requirements in any way. I ( and others ) in contrast, either are interested in the item or already own it. I can see why I ( and those interested in the camera ) would comment, but what precisely is the point of you being here?

I am not interested in needlepoint. Shall I go on a needlepoint forum and tell everyone why I am not interested, using hundreds of words and being argumentative? Would that be a sensible, sane thing to do ? This is precisely what you are doing. Frankly, it's weird.

I wanted to love this camera. But, it seems that my preference for shooting at night or in available light interiors is a deal killer. Miss after miss with this one. It often hunted forever and then fired at minimum focus. Maybe it's too much to ask for a better low light focusing system that fits in your pocket, but I'm asking anyway. I don't need the extra pixels, but I do need the shot to be in focus without destroying the moment with that horrible green light. Day exterior folks, trying to hide their camera, should love the Ricoh, but night stalkers will need to keep looking.

I'm perplexed over why anyone in their right mind would be interested in this camera. The same kind of perplexity can however be seen at the Canon stand. Power of marketing and brand loyalty cannot be overlooked. Fanboys galore 😎

Just because some people are interested in a product that doesn't make sense to you, that doesn't necessarily make them fanboys. They might have different preferences and requirements than you, and therefore see something of value that you're overlooking or don't care about.

@SignumX: you're right. this camera is for unassuming people who don't follow marketing strategies, most probably well informed and really interested in photography. Not for fanboys who criticize without ever having used what they criticize.

I am genuinely perplexed that a person can be on a photography site and not see the benefit of a sharp fast lens and a large sensor in a tiny, tiny package that slips in a jeans pocket. It is perplexing that Signumx is so perplexed and he / she simply does not see this.

I'm perplexed why people take photos with telephones...ohh yea..convenience and boy, aren't those phones expensive......The Ricoh is convenient because it is small and quite solid, something I find isn't the case with the Sony 100s. It also has a huge sensor compared to phones or the Sony. I personally find that all cameras with retracting lenses eat dust. Let's see how well the shaking sensor in the Ricoh deals with the issue.

The price and AF are not too bad...but it would be real nice had they kept the pop-up flash from the GR2. It has a leaf shutter and high sync speed which makes it great for back-lit subjects or to get rid of the racoon eyes, or to add nice catch light in the eyes.

Daftpunk the problem of this video , like most reviews on this new model, is not what they are saying but rather what they are leaving outMost of the virtues that they praised on this model are already present on the previous modelyes the GRIII has slighty better resolution but for many long-time GR users they know (or will find out once the newness of it disappears)that the GRII is a better tool... and significantlly cheaper too

I don't see it as a "a different camera class". Both are compact, digital cameras with APS-C sensor.

Main difference: Canon M50 is somewhat less compact, jacket pocket vs. shirt pocket. But it is a much better camera in all relevant aspects - namely EVF, AF, IQ, UI, performance ... and much more versatile, thanks to interchangeable lenses and system accesories.

If I would reviwe cameras according to my personal preferences, cameras with bolted-on single-focal length lens would get max. "49%" rating, if everything else were "perfect" ... IQ, AF, EVF, performance, UI/handling, price ... which is defintiely not the case for the GR III.

You can't downgrade a product for not being what it isn't supposed to be. If you want to use different lenses on your camera, you shouldn't be looking at a fixed-lens camera in the first place. It's a completely different product category.

I'm sorry, xeppelin, but your M50 fails completely at being a medium format camera. DPR clearly has a strong pro-Canon bias, otherwise they wouldn't give it 79% - obviously, it deserved at most 22.9% because that's precisely how much of a medium format camera it is.

So just compare EOS M 1st gen in terms of size ... even if EF-M 22/2.0 is added, there is not much of a difference. Yes, APS-C cameras with lens mount can also be built really compact. Unfortunately Ricoh/Pentax don't offer one.

Different types of products are judged with different standards. A family sedan would be marked down for having limited rear leg room, while a sports car may get a pass for having no rear seats at all.

saw the image. And know the size of it. While it may tightly fit, it is still too bulky to be carried in a regular shirt pocket for any length of time. At least I'd not want to do so. But then, I don't feel comfortable carrying even small smartphones in a shirt pocket. You folks may have "wider chests" and/or "deeper shirt pockets", lol.

In reality, GR III is also a "jacket pocket camera" just like a Canon EOS M100 with EF-M 22/2.0 lens or an EOS M50 (yes, slightly larger jacket pocket needed for that one due to EVF bump).

So for me, they are in the same "super-compact APS-C camera" class, and that's why i directly compare them. With Ricoh GR III I'd be stuck with only 1 focal length. Whereas a package only slightly bigger will give me a better camera [EVF, AF, performance, handling, UI] and a much more versatile one. For significantly less money.

The M50 with the lens is literally double the width of the Ricoh. Would you compare the M50 with a camera that is double its width with a lens and says it's basically the same size? Given your spiel here I doubt you've used the Ricoh in a practical fashion. Those that have can attest to the usefulness of such a small sized camera.

So... what you also need to understand is that some people like fixed lens cameras. The fixed lens is a strength not a weakness.

yep, I'll definitely never buy a camera with a fixed single focal length lens. Except in smartphone, which I have on me (almost) all the time.

To me cameras with only one focal length when I could as well have one with a lens mount and interchangeable lenses are "total fail". And I have a hard time to udnerstanding, why anyone would chose a less universal, less capable and more expensive photographic tool when better options are available.

Also under ecological/sustainability viewpoint I prefer modular digital products. Lenses generally serve me much longer than camera bodies which become technically obsolete every few years. Would hate having to dispose of a nice lens along with camera body when I swap it for a technically more advanced and better successor. To me it is a bit similar to buying those "one-way film cameras" [film pack with lens].

i never wear technical gear (phones, cameras) in my left jeans pocket. Way too uncomfortable. And it does not go well along with my keys i carry there. Right side is my [sometimes] used handkerchief, also not a good place to put cameras in. ;-)

In back jeans pockets I wear my wallet on 1 side. Other side - even if camera would fit - I'll never put it, because for sure I'd accidentally sit on it and break it.

so in my real life, any small camera is a "jacket pocket"-camera. EOS M6 or M50 size/weight is the max limit for me.

Other than in jacket pocket I often carry my EOS M plus lens in a small Lowepro Dashpoint pouch attached to left shoulder strap of a backpack. Hands-free, comfortable, somewhat protected and quicker to draw than from a shirt or jeans pocket. :-)

I've got the GR III partly to have a wide angle when my K-1 has the 150-450 on it (without carrying another DSLR), and partly to have it with me when I go out *without a camera bag*.L.E. Or a big pockets jacket in full summer.

You, you, you. Who cares about you?*I* would rather have the GR III than any of the inferior alternatives presented here.And for those occasions a GR III won't do, the inferior alternatives won't do either - and I'll get my SLR kit.

Ricoh completely owns the large sensor “shirt pocket camera” segment (1” sensor is not same IQ).

It seems so obvious to me that this combination of IQ, features and size is the perfect antidote against the smartphone monopoly: sure, it is an additional device, but just as pocketable, and so much better/easier/faster to use than that a laggy phone. Smartphone for selfies and stellar pocket camera for all the rest.

This is a crucial time for the photography industry, with mass-market dedicated cameras at risk of vanishing completely. So, yes, it is a pity that this iteration of the legendary GR line is underwhelming on key usability aspects. Ricoh had plenty of time for refinement and optimisation of the concept. They missed the target and there is no alternative.

Nikon almost got there with the excellent Coolpix A back in 2013, then dropped the ball. There is still a window of opportunity for someone to crack that nut, and bring out the Minox 35 or Olympus XA of the digital age!

@Daft Punk - I'd be delighted if Ricoh is as successful as your info sounds. That would in fact validate my main points: there is a big market opportunity for the concept and Ricoh completely owns the segment as there is no alternative. My personal opinion is that they could have done much better on key usability aspects, and that there still is an opportunity right now for others to step in with an alternative take on that concept.

I still have an Olympus XA. It doesn't have a built-in flash either. If I remember correctly there were two accessory flashes that attach to the side of the XA; I have the more powerful model. It's a wonderful design not having a top-heavy flash perched on the camera. The Ricoh cries out for a similar option.

Ah well. I guess I'll hold onto my original GR for a couple more years. It still works fine. The GRIII's poor battery life and shiny screen kind of kill for me. I was looking forward to this camera. And, given that it took Ricoh so long to bring it out, I can't understand why some of its flaws are so glaring. It seems like Ricoh hasn't really been working on the GRIII for very long at all. It seems much more like it got the green light a year or so ago and it was rushed into production.

I think you have to see the features you don't like as decisions you disagree with rather than flaws - no camera is perfect for everybody, let alone perfecr per se, but all design decisions are trade-offs.

ffking, some cameras are made very quickly and sent to the market. The amount of thought that went into the previous GRII, surpasses all possible tinkering about the GRIII. GRIII is not designed well, and no amount of self-assertion and autohypnosis can help make it better. It is the worst GR release ever.

Zvonimir Tosic- that's your opinion - it's not the opinion of the writers of this review who spent time with the camera and tested it. It also seems extremely unlikely your opinion represents the truth of the matter. What is likely is that you are either trolling or that you simply disagree with the design choices made by Ricoh. You have that right, and for you it might be true but it does not make it true for everybody.

Compare this poor Ricoh's attempt with Pentax cameras; it is like night and day difference! Pentax team would NEVER allow this to ship! Pentax team also designed MX-1 compact, and the Pentax Q, both were superbly designed and had ZERO hardware issues. MX-1 is so good, that today it catches a higher price than at its introduction – unheard of in the camera business!

I used to love the GRII as much as I dislike this stripped down and poorly thought new GRiii. Nobody who shoots street or even landscapes needs more than 16mp , and don’t tell me that you crop . If you need more than that for cropping than perhaps you need a zoom lens or just you are in the wrong business/hobby,The only reason Ricoh put a new 24mp ,perhaps Sony, sensor is because .There is no 16mp sensors being made (by Sony?)anymore. Tbc

Stabilization ? No need for 28/35/50mm . The only reason it’s there is to try and rectify the serious dust issues GRii has by shaking the dust off. No built in flash ! It’s the major flaw. If you don’t need it than perhaps you are in the wrong field again. Or buy a huge Pentax flashes.

Poor battery life! The point of such a small camera is not to fiddle with additional cords, power banks, spare batteries etc .

Poor low light focus. Worse buttons layout in exchange for a touch screen - always slower. Poorer built quality. Some other , more minor flaws. Tbh, I consider this camera as a huge failure.

ok, again the same comment we see from you on every article about GR III. I guess the same answer is only fitting. Just because you don't value the new features like IBIS doesn't mean that they're not useful to someone else.

Even if they could still get a 16mp sensor, how would asking $900 for a 16mp camera look from a marketing point of view? I'm sorry but touchscreen is almost a must for a new consumer camera. How would you gain back smartphone users if you don't offer the minimum they expect from the cheapest phone?

"If you don’t need it than perhaps you are in the wrong field again. "

Or maybe consider that this camera is not only a street camera but can be used for landscape/travel as well. There is no other camera or system that gets such a sharp lens in such a small camera. So yes, I'd get IBIS over flash anytime, but that's just me. Question is, how many customers are they losing because of it? maybe they can afford losing a few to gain more new customers...

@larkhonI don’t know why are you following my comments ,actually. One new review or article - a new comment. What’s the problem ? Is there a limit that I am not aware of? You are a bad lawyer , btw . Your argument that this is a good travel camera especially. Travel camera without a pop up flash with 150 shots/charge. Exactly!

A very good *dedicated* camera should be built around solid engineering premises and real photographer's demands. That is, it should be built like someone's life and constancy of results depend on it:

1. a very good sensor2. a very good lens performance throughout the frame3. excellent battery life4. excellent AF5. excellent sturdiness and dependency6. runs cool (no heating issues)

Only when these are all addressed, add some extra features. With GRIII, Ricoh failed in 4.5 out of 6 (because even the 'good' lens in GRIII is vignetting heavily). Let me ask any engineer: who on earth needs a *dedicated* $900 camera that has less battery life than a $300 smartphone with a similar FoV lens, is vignetting like a $50 pinhole camera, and is heating like a hotpod? Previous GR ticked more boxes than this release.

GRIII is not dedicated to photography: photography is about critical moments, and this camera fails in critical performance required for critical moments to be consistently captured. It is rushed out design, fails to deliver consistent and optimal performance of a dedicated product. Say, if cameras were cars, Ricoh has delivered a push-bike and persuades us that GRIII is a car, with two wheels, but is stabilised, and runs on alternative fuel too.

as good as the p30 is calling it the better of this new GR is like calling Egyptian cotton the same as polyester ... the versatile plastic fiber can be a soft and plush couch throw... or a rigid tray to hold your chips and guacamole

one creates image files and one fakes image files one is the real article ...a camera and one is an electronic Swiss army knife

a smartphone lets you game ... but calling it a gaming machine is absurd

a smartphone lets you watch video .... but put it on your living room wall instead of a proper television and you will be committed

a smartphone allows you to create a pleasing image .... but call it a real camera and ......... well ......you get the point

Bias toward to big camera is better [more important] than small camera.Bias toward to Fool Flame is better [ibid] than 4/3.Bias toward to Image Quality is better [] than Form Factor.Bias toward to Form Factor is better [] than Image Quality.

Bias is everywhere, guys. It's the same thing as debating about FF being the only way for serious photography. You buy something, based on knowledge, excitement for technology and/or whatever. Someone tells you that something new and/or something cheaper can do the same, how do you react?

Yet, one cannot dismiss an argument simply because of bias. We're not talking about best photophone against just any camera. The Ricoh GR holds its own against most cameras/lenses I have used, if the GR III is anything near this optical excellence, it is not unreasonable to think the best photophone is not enough to challenge it.

due to the very tiny sensor one could in theory have a fixed focus cellphone camera.in fact,that used to be the case. I know cellphone make good images. are almost foolproof, so serve their audience wellfrankly they improve & advance much quicker than cameras to their credit

While i love to listen to music on a phone \ have dozens of bands full discographies , i dont delude myself to think my phone is my audio system.. cause it isntalso,though i love having a pocket media server with tons of content, i never ever think my phone is my home theatre cause it aint. my cellphone is my primary phone however, a role that seems to fit perfectly while i enjoy games on my phone, it is not the nintendo switch. no one i know would imagine its gaming machine, its not, not a console not a gaming machine with high end gpu. i enjoy it for exactly what it is When i need to send visual info or accept some my phone is there

due to the very tiny sensor one could in theory have a fixed focus cellphone camera

i don't think so.my p30 pro has a not too tiny 1/1.7 sensor, its superior AF is due to having both dual pixel and a depth sensoreveryone can decide how much IQ is enough but the latest p30 pro/pixel phone IQ has get to quite decent level

and the all important processing of jpeg, i rarely see extreme dark shadow in phone pics but is common in jpeg of my A6500no matte how much dynamic range is in the sensor, one need to do RAW for each individual pic or rely on Lightroom "auto" to get it

phone has many advantage besides decent IQ and so their popularity is well deserved

"many don't need the best IQ but view a waterproof device with 3 FL 16/27/125mm as more important"

Somehow this is funny because people might think the same, put $800+ in a smartphone to have that range when a $200 camera would do the job. Sometimes people think the same way as when they're buying a huge car ; twice the year they go on holiday or buy furniture, and need the space, but most of the time they just go to work with it. Yet to carry bigger stuff they need to rent a truck anyway...The same way, most people are using digital zoom on their phone, with the quality compromises we know about. But if we don't care so much about IQ why go for the better zoom on P30 Pro? Would we trust someone to capture our wedding with that?

There are lots of compact cameras made with a 1/1.7", my LF1 is still unbeaten for range/size/weight/IQ ratio. A difference though with P30 Pro would be that the 1/1.7" covers all focal lengths on a dedicated camera, while other sensors on P30 Pro have smaller sensors.

yeah but I don't think it matters so much for a wide angle lens. Before we had 1" sensor we were pretty happy with 1/1.7" and a fast lens. I'd more worried about the other sensors, I can't find much information yet. I believe on the P20 Pro there was a 1/3" sensor for the longer focal length, this one will be definitely worse. Can the bigger sensors compensate?

It is not perfectly clear from the review if it was tested with the upgraded firmware.There is a brief mention that its a bit better, but its kind of like an afterthought.This youtube suggests it is much much better - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv4wSsvGOb0

Possibly that video was set up in a way to highlight a benefit in a very specific use case that is not representative of the general improvement in autofocus.

No lens cap - this is an absolute must for me, I sold my Fuji x70 because it has a lens cap.Internal memory - nice to have, would have saved me on two previous occasions, once where I forgot the card, once where I had a card fail. 2GB for a day is enough for me.

Also for my use, IBIS is the most needed feature, so I am in the back order queue for one of these.

We've been eager to test the Ricoh GR III since it arrived, so in addition to a sample gallery and a thorough DPReview TV analysis, it's also been added to our studio test scene comparison tool. Take a look at how it compares to its peers.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1X is the ultimate sports, action and wildlife camera for professional Micro Four Thirds users. However, it can't quite match the level of AF reliability offered by its full frame competitors.

The HD Pentax-D FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW is a high quality standard prime lens for Ricoh's full-frame Pentax DSLRs. Ricoh has made great claims about its pro-grade construction and excellent sharpness – how does it stack up?

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

We've updated our waterproof camera buying guide with the latest round of rugged compacts, and we've crowned a new winner as the best pick in the category: the Olympus TG-6. That is, unless you happen to find a good deal on the TG-5.

Researchers with the Samsung AI Center in Moscow and the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology have created a system that transforms still images into talking portraits with as little as a single image.

K&R Photographics, a camera store in Crescent Springs, Kentucky, was robbed by armed men, who not only took thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment, but also injured the 70-year-old co-owner of the store.

The new Fujifilm GFX 100 boasts some impressive specifications, including 100MP, in-body stabilization and 4K video. But what's it like to shoot with? Senior Editor Barnaby Britton found out on a recent trip to Florence, Italy.

It's here! The long-awaited next-generation Fujifilm GFX has been officially launched. Click through to learn more about the camera that Fujifilm is hoping will shake up the pro photography market - the GFX100.

We've known about the Fujifilm GFX 100 since last fall, but now it's official: this 102MP medium-format monster will be available at the end of June for $10,000. In addition to its incredible resolution, the camera also has in-body IS, a hybrid AF system, 4K video and a removable EVF.

According to DJI, any drone model weighing over 250 grams will have AirSense Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers installed to help drone operators know when planes and helicopters are nearby.

Chris and Jordan are kicking off a new segment in which they make feature suggestions to manufacturers for the benefit of all photographer-kind. To start things off, they take a look at the humble USB-C port and everything it could be doing for us.

The Olympus TG-5 is one of our favorite waterproof cameras, and the company today introduced the TG-6, a relatively low-key update. New features include the addition of an anti-reflective coating on the sensor, a higher-res LCD, and more underwater and macro modes.

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

We've been playing around with a prototype of the new Peak Design Travel Tripod and are impressed so far: it's incredibly compact, fast to deploy and stable enough for the heaviest bodies. However, the price may turn some away.